In In re Short Bark Industries Inc., 17-11502 (Bankr. D. Del. Sept. 11, 2017), Judge Kevin Gross of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware read the Supreme Court’s holding in Jevic narrowly in connection with a settlement of a dispute on DIP financing.
The bankruptcy bar is abuzz following the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., 15-649, 2017 BL 89680, 85 U.S.L.W. 4115 (Sup. Ct. March 22, 2017), holding that bankruptcy courts may not approve structured dismissals that do not adhere to the Bankruptcy Code’s priority scheme.
A debtor cannot recover sanctions or attorneys’ fees under 11 U.S.C. § 362(k) when the debtor admits to having suffered no actual damages and the filing of a motion for sanctions was not necessary to remedy a stay violation.[1] Denying the debtor’s motion for sanctions, the U.S.
Click here to view the table.
Bankruptcy lawyers across the country learned this lesson in 2015: A fine year can be a flat year.
On 24 March, HMRC published a summary of responses to the December consultation on Company Distributions, together with details of the Government's position on the issues raised. The December consultation was covered in my 3 February blog.
Today is the closing date for responses to a Government consultation on the tax treatment of company distributions. You can read the consultation document here.
The direction of travel, per the consultation, is clear. Anyone thinking of liquidating their company should consider these new rules carefully.
With the cyclical fluctuation in oil and gas commodity prices, the UKCS has had its fair share of E&P companies going insolvent. As the UKCS matures, the profile of companies that invest in the region is changing. Many smaller parties, potentially with less access to capital, are now building positions. The commercial exposure is that some companies will not be able to meet cash calls, creating headaches for their co-venturers.